Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2006 23:14:02 -0800 From: User Bbearnes Subject: Re: wiki markup To: Alan Grow All right, so I've got a multipart answer. Part one is is I think the core wiki markup is a slighly modified version of the original c2/usemod standard: CamelCase and/or [[page to link to]] [http://what.the.fuck.ever linktext] ---- -> horizontal rule initial space -> preformatted/monospace text * -> bulleted list item # -> numbered list item = header 1 = == header 2 == === header 3 === etc. :blockquote ::more indented/nested blockquote -- -> &mdash, in some systems. In general stuff follows plaintext e-mail "styles", with a notable exception: ''<i>talics or <em>phasized'' '''<b>old or <strong>''' Which is actually fucking stupid; it should clearly be *strong* and _emphasized_. I've been using a wiki at work that does this, since it's part of Textile, which is one of its default available languages. Which brings me to my second part - you could just use Textile, which does some cool stuff. I don't know that there's a library out there to interpret it, but as far as I know it originates with a free licensed blogging package called TextPattern, so there ought to be one. Textile is cool up to a point - for 90% of the markup you will ever do - then it starts grating on my sensibilities. Third part: I know portability is always a concern, but I think it's actually far less of one with decent wiki markup, since it's pretty much the closest thing you're going to get with any real features to human-readable plaintext. It would be trivial to parse your wikitext out into any necessary intermediary if you decided to migrate later - a lot more trivial than it will be for the 6 years worth of HTML and embedded Perl I've got sitting in a pile here.
p1k3 / 2006 / 3 / 11 / wiki_markup